DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Photographers Direct
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 59, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/18/2006 01:53:25 AM · #1
Not meant to be an advertisement!

That said, just wanted to make more of you guys aware of PhotographersDirect
Its a macro stock site with a twist. Buyers post their needs and you post your specialties and sales get made face to face or email to email. Not 3 years for a $100 check. You talk to the buyer. You earn REAL cash for sales - based on the ammount offered by the buyers - you see the offer before you submit. Posted today were buyers for a photo of a cartographer, loblolly pines and the John Hancock building in Chicago.

These postings come every day and anyone can submitt an image for consideration as long as it meets the buyer's requirements.

We, as a DPC community, worldwide, could easily meet the needs of all of PD's buyers so easily if it were made a project.

Their buyers are everywhere and the projects - to me - are much like DPC challenges, you have a task, shoot it, submit it - then wait... lol seems so familiar. lol

To the PD administrator, Chris - you owe me! lol I do feel strongly about this site as a great stepping off point for freelance photographers. Chris found me by following a post I had here, on DPC, a few months ago. Since then, I considered PhotographersDirect my stock agent who gives me the assignments each week or month (by the jobs I care to submit to) and so far its worked really well.

Message edited by author 2006-02-18 01:55:20.
 02/18/2006 01:59:45 AM · #2
There have been a number of other forum threads about PD, like this one.
 02/18/2006 02:02:52 AM · #3
Yes, I understand there have been other threads. All that I found were inquiries - this is an endorsement, I thought it would add to our knowledge as a community. There are other DPCers who have joined, perhaps they will share their experience.

Message edited by author 2006-02-18 02:03:30.
 02/18/2006 02:15:39 AM · #4
Originally posted by idnic:
Yes, I understand there have been other threads. All that I found were inquiries - this is an endorsement, I thought it would add to our knowledge as a community. There are other DPCers who have joined, perhaps they will share their experience.


I joined them a while back. I think I submitted to a couple requests but didn't sell anything. If I paid more attention to what is being requested I might actually make some money....my on fault. I think the site as a whole is real good. jmho
 02/18/2006 03:07:14 AM · #5
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
Originally posted by idnic:
Yes, I understand there have been other threads. All that I found were inquiries - this is an endorsement, I thought it would add to our knowledge as a community. There are other DPCers who have joined, perhaps they will share their experience.


I joined them a while back. I think I submitted to a couple requests but didn't sell anything. If I paid more attention to what is being requested I might actually make some money....my on fault. I think the site as a whole is real good. jmho


So there's nobody looking for photos of pugs??? Unpossible.
 02/18/2006 03:23:22 AM · #6
Originally posted by yanko:

So there's nobody looking for photos of pugs??? Unpossible.


Go figure! I thought for sure someone on there would need some good pug pics.
 02/18/2006 04:13:38 AM · #7
Actually, I am impressed by the site, I think I'll join up. Ihave visited all of the other sites and nowhere did I feel comfortable that the agency wasn't making way too much money compared to the photgrapher. The 80/20 commission balance in favour of the photographer is very fair and realistic.

Now for the tricky question. I have a 5 megapix camera, can I produce a 6mp image by a bicubic resize upwards in photoshop? I've never fully understood interpolation even though I've read quite a bit about it.

Brett
 02/18/2006 04:16:48 AM · #8
Have it on my favorites menu.

But, then again, I have alot on my favorites menu.
 02/18/2006 06:09:16 AM · #9
I've been with them for a year or so now. I don't have a lot of shots that meet their submissions.....but I did sell one for $250 a few months ago.

It is definitely worth a try. A lot of the shots requested are for different locations around the world, so you may just have access to such places!

Edited to add that I also haven't submitted a ton to them so don't use my one sale to gauge the success of the site :)

Message edited by author 2006-02-18 06:13:42.
 02/18/2006 09:24:42 AM · #10
Originally posted by KiwiPix:
Actually, I am impressed by the site, I think I'll join up. Ihave visited all of the other sites and nowhere did I feel comfortable that the agency wasn't making way too much money compared to the photgrapher. The 80/20 commission balance in favour of the photographer is very fair and realistic.

Now for the tricky question. I have a 5 megapix camera, can I produce a 6mp image by a bicubic resize upwards in photoshop? I've never fully understood interpolation even though I've read quite a bit about it.

Brett


Chris is pretty strict on having at least a 6mp camera - he doesn't want upsized shots on there. :(
 02/18/2006 09:43:01 AM · #11
Thanks for the post, some interesting recent requests that I think I can fill. I've applied for membership.
 02/18/2006 10:37:25 AM · #12
Sounds real interesting. They won't take photogs that are at any of the microstock sites though. From the sign-up page:

"Because you will always deal direct with clients when selling images through Photographers Direct, we are non-exclusive. This means we have no restrictions on photographers selling the same images through other agencies. The only exceptions are micropayment sites such as istockphoto, canstockphoto, shutterstock, dreamstime, bigstockphoto, crestock - we cannot represent photographers who market their images on these sites."

Which I guess makes sense for their concept. :)

Message edited by author 2006-02-18 10:37:56.
 02/20/2006 03:40:26 PM · #13
They're pretty harsh with their ratings... I submitted these 2 photos to a request for Italian images which needed to have a PD rating of 8. I was given 7 for them both which I think is pretty harsh. I think it's purely a way to get people to pay the extra money for a subscription based membership.


02/20/2006 03:58:14 PM · #14
I noticed one of the requests was for photos of the Chinese New Year Parade in San Francisco. Wanted to mention that in case any of the other Bay Area DPC'ers want to submit some of theirs.
 02/20/2006 04:13:24 PM · #15
The only thing I don't like about the concept is the time comitment. I much prefer shooting what I want when I have time and then uploading them to micro or macro sites.
02/20/2006 04:27:21 PM · #16
It's basically spec work. Evil.
 02/20/2006 04:59:59 PM · #17
Hmmm...I just went and took a look. Seemed like a good idea, being able to take projects when I had time. And then I see that they won't represent any photog who has ANY images with ANY microstock! I don't want to hijack this, but any group who rants against the microstocks and has rules like that...well, I think it's crap. Mico isn't perfect, but that doesn't give them the right to tell me who I can and can't do business with, if I'm going to assosciate with them. I can see not having the same image in both fields, but they take it too far and come across as obnoxious and snotty.
Just my $.02
 02/20/2006 05:30:11 PM · #18
Agreed, please lets not turn this into a micro vs. macro debate.

The site clearly states it's philosophy as to why it does not allow their photographers to use micro sites.

If you don't agree with the philosophy then I would recommend going somewhere else.

It's definitely a site for the macro photographers out there.
 02/20/2006 05:44:32 PM · #19
I love PD! The requests are really funny sometimes and you have to be at the right place at the right time, but the $$ is goooooooooooooood.
 02/20/2006 06:48:42 PM · #20
I'm beginning to wonder about hem. I joined up a week ago, got a confirmation but haven't heard a thing since, certainly no emails

Brett
 02/21/2006 12:27:11 PM · #21
Thanks for this post - it reminded me to go and have a look at my account, as a consequence of which I submitted some pics to a request and may have just made a sale!
03/01/2006 11:45:24 AM · #22
Thanks again - sale completed!

My camera body has now paid for itself. Need to start working on paying off some of the accessories and lenses next...
 03/01/2006 11:47:49 AM · #23
Ah great job! Grats on the sale :)
 03/01/2006 01:19:50 PM · #24
I had a stock request come through from Argentina.

All the buyer sent me was "15"x15" @ 300dpi. How much??"

After repeated emails he just dissappeared. I was a little dissapointed that PD doesn't get normal stock info when a request is made from an image search. I assume he thought the image was RF which it was not, but after trying to get basic info like use, print run, timeframe, etc. he just sent back the same "15"x15" @ 300dpi. How much??". It was very frustrating and made me wonder if I really wanted to deal with the buyers myself.
 03/17/2006 11:32:35 PM · #25
Hey Guys, I just registered with Photographers Direct yesterday and have been reading up on their file size requirements. I apologize in advance if this is a stupid question but I'm a bit confused on how to get my photos to stay above 6.0mp. When I shoot raw my photos usually come to 6mp, sometimes right below like at 5.8 or 5.4mp. I usually don't shoot RAW but at the largest fine file size. This does not give me 6mp, more like 4mp.

Here's my thing, I use Canon digital camera File Viewer Utility to process my RAW files and convert them to jpeg files so that I can work on them in PS 7 (can't work on RAW files in 7) I save them at the highest level but that still only leaves me at around 4mp after converting unless I convert them to TIFF which makes them around 18mp.

Am I doing something wrong? The size of my photos are about the 3000 pixel size limit they suggest your photos be at but I'm having a hard time getting them to stay at or around 6mp. Should I save them as TIFF files work on them in PS, then convert them to jpeg? Will this give me the file size I need?

Again, I don't usually shoot RAW so I'm still not real familiar with the best way to convert them to jpeg without reducing the file size too much. Do you find that 6MP is required for the sales you've made? or is having the file at 300dpi with the required pixel requirements good enough?

Any help or suggestions you can offer would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for putting up with my long-winded lameness. ;-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 07:19:04 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 07:19:04 PM EDT.